discrimination in preschool?

It is very rare to provide an aide for a 3 yr old-I worked in Early Intervention(0-3) and many 3 yr olds go on to regular preschool classes-my agency often went in them to provide training for staff. I never saw an aide even suggested although some children had private nurses(through medicaid???)

Also, even when a child qualified for preschool special ed, it was rare to the nth degree to have summer school paid for. Im talking arguing summer coverage for kids who are completely wheelchair bound, tube fed, and receiving every therapy conceivable.

If her disabilities are mild, I think the school doesnt have a leg to stand on with saying NO. And the only REAL reason Ive known a school to deny entrance is lack of toilet training.

But, would one really want their child at a preschool that is uncomfortable with her? It sounds as if there are other options

Does this child have an IEP?

Definately don’t put a kid where she isn’t wanted but an interesting question is; Do children have constitutional and civil rights. How much constitutional protection do they have?

A child defined as a child with a disability has civil rights.

under section 504 antidiscrimination law it states:

§ 104.38 Preschool and adult education.

A recipient to which this subpart applies that provides preschool education or day care or adult education may not, on the basis of handicap, exclude qualified handicapped persons and shall take into account the needs of such persons in determining the aid, benefits, or services to be provided.

Notice it states recipient? This means any public entity that recieves federal funding. This could be reduced lunches,the milk program,equipment from the county school. A penny of funding either directly or indirectly,makes the recipient obligated to comply with this section of federal law.

Then there is ADA. And it states:
Subpart D — Program Accessibility

§ 35.149 Discrimination prohibited.

Except as otherwise provided in § 35.150, no qualified individual with a disability shall, because a public entity’s facilities are inaccessible to or unusable by individuals with disabilities, be excluded from participation in, or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any public entity.

§ 35.150 Existing facilities.

(a) General. A public entity shall operate each service, program, or activity so that the service, program, or activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. This paragraph does not —

(1) Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

(2) Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

(3) Require a public entity to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. In those circumstances where personnel of the public entity believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the service, program, or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, a public entity has the burden of proving that compliance with § 35.150(a) of this part would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the head of a public entity or his or her designee after considering all resources available for use in the funding and operation of the service, program, or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a public entity shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the public entity.

(b) Methods. (1) General. A public entity may comply with the requirements of this section through such means as redesign of equipment, reassignment of services to accessible buildings, assignment of aides to beneficiaries, home visits, delivery of services at alternate accessible sites, alteration of existing facilities and construction of new facilities, use of accessible rolling stock or other conveyances, or any other methods that result in making its services, programs, or activities readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. A public entity is not required to make structural changes in existing facilities where other methods are effective in achieving compliance with this section. A public entity, in making alterations to existing buildings, shall meet the accessibility requirements of § 35.151. In choosing among available methods for meeting the requirements of this section, a public entity shall give priority to those methods that offer services, programs, and activities to qualified individuals with disabilities in the most integrated setting appropriate.

Now if this child has an IEP, she has even more protection under Individuals with disabilities education act. At age 3,the federal government deems this child has the right to a Free and appropriate public education,under early intervention sections of this act.
This would mean the public school is obligated to provide services,what it doesn’t mean is the public school has to provide an Aide.

The Daycare has some responsibilities in regards to the accessibility of there program. If they can not make the facility safe to move about in with this child’s limited abilities,then they are obligated to provide the aide.

IN all actuality the daycare,should be a safe enviroment for emerging development of infants and toddlers,if this isn’t the case,I would be concerned with their program anyway,disabled or nondisabled.

The fight to protect a child’s rights who happens to have a disability is an enormous task,it is a task that emcompasses their life time. If you can’t walk away,like me:-) Why start already??

Yes, and in it there is no mention of an aid. I think they could ask for a review, but she is making progress without the aid so it wouldnt fall under “appropriate” education (under the benefit rule which gives students a right to an appropriate education, but not to the best education possible)

First,it sounds like the private day care IS willing to accept this child, even though this particular student may not be typical of their other students—that does not sound like discrimination under ADA; second, this students’s IEP may call for extended year services at a particular center, but the parent is choosing another placement—that does not sound like a violation of special ed./ IEP; third, the parent-chosen center would like an aide for this child—if this is not in the IEP, and if this center is not the IEP-funded placement, it seems to be up to the parent to fund this choice, which may include an aide. Unless this is a state with some type of state or medicaid funded voucher system for special ed. preschool services, I doubt public funds can pay for a private placement chosen by parents without an IEP meeting way ahead of time.

Boy do I hate lawyers for all their “legal” trickery and out right deception. The hedge words are “qualified handicapped”. What does that really mean? Sounds like an oxymoron to me. Do the hedge words qualified handicapped let certain entities off the hook? I bet they do.

Have you lokked into your state laws as to the preschool’s legal obligations?